Are the 'Anti-Fascists' in the U.S. actually the fascists?


Like attack people that disagree with their views?

Like what AntiFa are doing.

Umm,… No.

The right of retaliation was given as they attack first.

He wanted to stop Nazism because Hitler had invaded several countries.

Which they weren’t. AntiFa didn’t retaliate, they attack first. Retaliation is justified.

No, they instead want to spread certain ideologies of AntiFa though violence.

However, it’s almost always opposite that’s reported by MSM and witness bloggers.

Yeah, if they were Israel and they had Egypt, Syria, Jordan etc placing armaments on their doorstep. Otherwise a great many of the attacks carried out by AntiFa were done because some people said some words they didn’t like.

Soz preemptively posted before finishing.


So ideas can exist without conflict and tolerance and discrimination unless you do not like them?

How do you not see the doublethink here?

Who decides what is discrimination and intolerance? The idiots who think Milo is a racist homophobic white supremacist?

Do you not see the fucking difference for simply saying something and actually doing something?

He wanted to stop them from killing people.

They use violence to prevent people speaking about ideas that do not like.

How the fuck is that not authoritarian?

The above is not equality, tolerance or acceptance. They are against those things for people they do not like.

Someone speaking ideas they do not like is not threatening them and does not warrant violence.


No they want to end conflict by standing up to those who want to initiate it.

No they don’t. The whole fucking point of antifa is to stand up to racism and bigotry when it occurs; when demonstrations by racist groups occur, antifascists go to oppose it.


Obviously what he’s saying doesn’t apply to ideologies inherently based on conflict. Think a bit.


“Oppose hatred” proceeds to beat innocent civilians for their suspected political opinions in a hateful manner


So you the left will finnaly abandon Islam as your unholy ally?


Except the vast majority of the people AntiFa physically attack are either innocent or don’t actually want to initiate violence or have the capacity to do so.

The sure, go for it, but when you start to physically attack other people first, you become a violent bigot.

That’s fine, I’m not against counter-protests. I’m against riotous behaviour and attacking people because hurr durr they said something I don’t like. It’s that sort of behaviour that gives peaceful fascists the moral high ground.


By oppose you mean beat the crap out of right, communist apologist


Please let @Il_Duce_No.2 down lightly then.

Actions speak louder than a stupid name.
That’s why I hate BLM.

@oli What the fuck are you smoking?


No, but they already condemn Muslims who preach hateful and intolerant ideas, in the same way that they condemn Christians and Atheists who say the same things. Intolerance should be condemned, but Islam is not inherently intolerant.

Evidence? AntiFa demonstrations are 99% of the time totally peaceful. A racist group will come out to protest against a minority, and AntiFa will come to oppose them, but no force will be initiated. I have been to many of these kinds of protests. Very rarely, violence breaks out between the two groups, but I don’t think you have any evidence to see this as AntiFa initiating violence on the Fascists.

They don’t, they go to protest against the Fascists and protect the community from the violence Fascists want to inflict upon them, even if that means violent self-defence.

There is no such thing. Fascism inherently entails exclusionary politics were minorities are discriminated against, marginalised, or exiled by a majority.

What? In a society where we want to eliminate conflict and discrimination (i.e, to be tolerant and live in a tolerant society) ideas can exist unless they promote conflict and discrimination. Otherwise they should be publicly condemned and, if necessary, the perpetrators should be physically stopped from carrying out discrimination and conflict. If someone wants to physically hurt someone, everyone should stop them from doing that.

You’re not listening to me Cameron. I’m not going to repeat myself again so go back and read my posts if you want to debate me. Otherwise this debate will go round and round in circles because you fail to understand my argument and force me to keep explaining myself.


Who gets to decide which ideologies those are?

What if those people think an ideology is about that when it is actually not?

You need to think a bit.[quote=“oli, post:43, topic:109929”]
No they want to end conflict by standing up to those who want to initiate it.
They are the ones initiating violence.

They were rioting because of someone who is not even those things but they just think he is.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Islam is inherently intolerant to non Muslims.

What they did in Berkley or during Trumps inauguration was in no way self defence.

That does not require violence.

You do not eliminate conflict and discrimination with conflict and discrimination. You just end up becoming the thing your sought out to destroy and perpetuating the cycle. This is the kind of logic people like the Nazis used to justify oppression of the Jews.

You get rid of it by allowing them to speak it and showing why they are wrong. If their ideas are bad they will lose the debate and people will see them lose.

You only resort to violence when they use violence first. AntiFa are the ones using violence. They are closer to Nazis than the people they call fascists.

The other points you made have already been refuted.

You are the one not listening. you are the one failing to understand the arguments because you are tribal and dogmatic and seem to lack the ability to view something from a perspective other than your own narrow one.

You are getting your arse handed to you because of that.


Nazism is literally based on the idea of genocide, what the fuck do you mean who gets to decide? People with at least half a brain cell.


Do you realize that some people may falsely (knowingly or not) declare an idea to be violent and use that as justification to censor it?


We’re talking about societal movements, not state-sponsored censorship.

Well… that’s what I’m tralking about. I can’t vouch for Oli because I wouldn’t put that past him.




Using violence to stop someone from speaking is wrong whether it is done by a government or not.


Evidence of AntiFa being violent without being provoked?
(also vandalism isn’t considered violence in my books)

But Muslims can be and are tolerant to non-Muslims. Islam isn’t a monolithic and homogeneous entity.

They do use violence first. AntiFa are designed to organise resistance to fascists who come to promote violence within minority communities.


We’re talking about a society where using violence to stop ideologies that advocate violence is okay.


Oli is the ‘left wing equivalent’ of a fascist. I call him… a leftscist.


Oh really? From their website.

Show those Nazis that you mean hell. You are going to fight, kick, scream, burn, and punch those Nazi sub-human pieces of trash!